Abstract
AbstractForensic High and Intensive Care (FHIC) has recently been developed as a new care model in Dutch forensic psychiatry. FHIC aims to provide contact-based care. To support Dutch forensic care institutions in the implementation of the model, a model fidelity scale was developed called the FHIC monitor. The aim of this study was to assess the inter-rater reliability, content validity, and construct validity of the FHIC monitor. A multi-methods design was used, combining qualitative and quantitative research. To collect data, audits and focus group meetings were organized to score care at individual wards with the monitor and get feedback from auditors and audit receiving teams about the quality of the monitor. In total, fifteen forensic mental healthcare institutions participated. The instrument showed acceptable inter-rater reliability and content validity, and a significant difference between expected high and low scoring institutions, supporting construct validity. The instrument can be used as a valid instrument to measure the level of implementation of the FHIC model on forensic psychiatric wards in the Netherlands.
Funder
Kwaliteit Forensische Zorg
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
Psychiatry and Mental health,Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy,Pshychiatric Mental Health
Reference20 articles.
1. Becker, D. R., Swanson, S., Reese, S. L., Bond, G. R., & McLeman, B. M. (2015). Evidence-based supported employment fidelity review manual (3rd ed.). Dartmouth Psychiatric Research Center.
2. Bogaerts, S., Spreen, M., Ter Horst, P., & Gerlsma, C. (2018). Predictive validity of the HKT-R risk assessment tool: Two and 5-year violent recidivism in a nationwide sample of Dutch forensic psychiatric patients. International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 62(8), 2259–2270. https://doi.org/10.1177/0306624X17717128
3. Bond, G. R., Becker, D. R., & Drake, R. E. (2011). Measurement of fidelity of implementation of evidence-based practices: Case example of the IPS Fidelity Scale. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 18(2), 126–141. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2011.01244.x
4. Bond, G. R., & Drake, R. E. (2020). Assessing the fidelity of evidence-based practices: History and current status of a standardized measurement methodology. Administration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research, 47, 874–884. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10488-019-00991-6
5. de Vet, H. C., Terwee, C. B., Knol, D. L., & Bouter, L. M. (2006). When to use agreement versus reliability measures. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(10), 1033–1039. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.015
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献，注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献，订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献